[SC.LUG] Open Source NHS anyone?

[Richard Pineger]

I understand what you are saying George. Open Source does, I suppose, refer
simply to software. However, there are many many collaborative standards
being written for example, RFCs. The processes that generate those could be
run to the benefit of local parts of the NHS. And, if you consider that the
NHS is the second largest employer in the world, yes, it might be besoke to
the NHS but the NHS itself has a turnover of more than some small countries.

I know it is pie-in-the-sky but does a place exist where these doctors and
consultants and IT specialists are collaborating on what they _actually_
want? Somewhere wbere standards can emerge?

Everyone is talking about the diversity necessary and standards necessary
for communication. I just feel that, given the size of the NHS it could
learn an awful lot from the open source and RFC (or OASIS or W3C)
development process.

Does anyone have any contact with the movers and shakers in the NHS? Who
knows where to start to build a collaborative process?

Richard

-----Original Message-----
From: sc-bounces at mailman.lug.org.uk [mailto:sc-bounces at mailman.lug.org.uk]
On Behalf Of George
Sent: 14 March 2007 21:22
Cc: 'S. Cheshire Free Software User Group'
Subject: Re: [SC.LUG] Open Source NHS anyone?

Richard Pineger wrote:
> I was wondering, now that the NHS IT refresh NPfIT is starting to 
> crumble, is there a place for an Open Source alternative created by a 
> community of concerned citizens who, after all, really want a health
service?
> 
> Does anyone else apart for me have any experience of this IT project? 
> I can set up a wiki for people to throw some ideas up and I could 
> start a petition on that petitions website.
> 
> What do you think?

I don't think the problem has been caused by Proprietary vs Open Source but
rather poor management from EDS and the NHS, from the scoping of the
contract through to it's delivery. I don't think the open development
methodology would have reduced costs - it'd have to be bespoke tailored to
the NHS' requirements so they'd be the ones that had to pay people to scope,
write, implement or whatever it is that consultants do. The actual reusable
infrastructure of the system might benefit from using open source and indeed
might be already - it would of course be in EDS' 
interests to use them if it allowed them to submit a more competitive bid.

That said one of the comments from a doctor (I forget where, although I
suspect it might have been the TV documentary) was that a problem with the
project was that they were attempting to go for a huge, complex national
system to be rolled out to all the practices, hospitals, etc. 
whereas if they had simply defined standards for the various functions such
as data exchange a decision could have been made at a local level about what
systems were appropriate for their needs. These smaller sub systems would
also be more likely to be developed in an open manner, with there being an
interest to share functionality between the various solutions.

George

Send instant messages to your online friends http://in.messenger.yahoo.com